European School Heads Association General Board Meeting Luxembourg, March 9

1
European School Heads AssociationGeneral Board
MeetingLuxembourg, March 9

• PISA and School Leadership
• Bernard Hugonnier
• OECD Deputy Director for Education

2
Outline

• PISA
• School leadership
• Thematic review
• International survey (TALIS)

3
PISA assessment schedule
4
PISA sampling requirements

• Population all 15-year-olds in school
• excludes 15-year-olds out of school
• includes 15-year-olds in special education
  institutions
• could exclude up to 5 of 15-year-olds in school
• few countries failed to reach required coverage
  in 2003

5
PISA sampling requirements

• Sample
• minimum of 150 schools per country
• 30 students per school
• two random samples schools and replacement
  schools
• if school declines, replacement school is invited
• 41 participating countries
• 275,000 students

6
PISA information collected

• Volume of questions
• 3½ hours of mathematics assessment
• 1 hour for each of reading, science and problem
  solving
• Students
• 2 hours on paper-and-pencil tasks (subset of all
  questions)
• ½ hour for questionnaire on background, learning
  habits, learning environment, engagement and
  motivation
• Principals
• questionnaire (school demography, learning
  environment quality)

7
PISA Proficiency Levels in Mathematics
OECD
4
Level 6
10
Level 5
18
Level 4
22
Level 3
21
Level 2
15
Level 1
BelowLevel 1
11
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 2.5a, p.354.
8
Percentage of students at each of the proficiency
levels on the mathematics scale
Level 6
Level 5
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Below Level 1
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 2.5a, p.354.
9

Reading literacy
Finland 15 France7Spain 4 Japan 10 USA
9
10
Level 5
22
Level 4
29
Level 3
Finland 5 France11Spain 15 Japan
12 USA 13
22
Level 2
12
Level 1
OECD Average
Finland 1 France 6Spain 5 Japan 7 USA
7
6
Below Level 1
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 6.1, p.443.
10
Percentage of students at each of the proficiency
levels in reading
Level 5
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Below Level 1
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 6.1, p.443.
11
Problem Solving
OECD
Problem solving Level 3 Reflective, communicative
problem solvers.
17
Level 3
Problem solving Level 2 Reasoning,
decision-making problem solvers.
31
Level 2
Problem solving Level 1Basic problem solvers.
Level 1
30
Below Level 1Weak or emergent problem solvers.
BelowLevel 1
22
OECD (2004), Problem solving for tomorrows
world First results from PISA 2003.
12
Percentage of students at each of the proficiency
levels in problem solving
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Below Level 1
OECD (2004), Problem solving for tomorrows
world First results from PISA 2003.
13
Performance in all domains
Mathematics
Problem Solving
Reading
Science
14
Student performance and national
income per capita
Performance in mathematics
GDP per capita (US)
15
Student performance and spending per student
Finland
Korea
Japan
Netherlands
Belgium
Canada
Switzerland
Czech republic
Australia
Iceland
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
Ireland
Austria
France
Slovak republic
Hungary
Norway
Performance in mathematics
Poland
Spain
United States
Italy
Portugal
Greece
Mexico
R2 0.28
Cumulative expenditure (US)
16
Public and private schools
Public schools perform better
Private schools perform better
17
Pre-school attendance and performance
38 score points is the average performance
difference associated with one school year
Difference in performance between those who
attended pre-school for more than one year and
those with no pre-school
Difference in performance between those who
attended pre-school for one year or less and
those with no pre-school
Percentage of students who attended pre-school
18
Social background is a powerful
factorinfluencing student performance(Parental
occupation, wealth, cultural resources, parental
education, family structure, immigrant
status) But poor performance does not
automatically follow
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Figure 4.8, p.176.
19
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Figure 4.9, p.179.
20
High performance
High performance Low social equity
High performance High social equity
High equity
PISA
Low performance Low social equity
Low performance High social equity
21
HighMathematics performance
High performance Low social equity
High performance High social equity
Moderate impact of social background on
performance
Strong impact of social background on performance
Low performance Low social equity
Low performance High social equity
Low Performance
22
Variation in student performance in mathematics
Variation of performance within schools
Variation of performance between schools
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 4.1a, p.383.
23
Gender differences
Females perform better
Males perform better
Females perform better
Males perform better
Performance in mathematics
Performance in reading
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Tables 2.5c, 6.3, pp.356,
445.
24
Interest in and enjoyment of mathematics and
performance in mathematics
Males
Females
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 3.1, p.359.
25
Anxiety in mathematics and performance in
mathematics
Low
High
Females
Males
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 3.8, p.374.
26
Gender differences
Females perform better
Males perform better
Females perform better
Males perform better
Performance in science
Performance in problem solving
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrows world First
results from PISA 2003, Table 6.7, p.449. OECD
(2004), Problem solving for tomorrows world
First results from PISA 2003.
27
II. Improving School leadership

• Two activities
• A thematic review involving 20 countries
• An international survey involving 22 countries

28
Reasons for such activities

• Evidence that principals have a direct impact on
  schooling outcomes and are key drivers of school
  reform (Teachers Matter, OECD 2005)
• Lack of knowledge on school leadership
  recognition, feedback, reward and evaluation of
  teachers teaching practices, beliefs, and
  attitudes teachers professional development,
  experience qualifications school climate
• Evidence of shortages of high-qualified school
  leader candidates, e.g.
• Australia 92 principals expected to
  retire/resign more than five years before they
  'have to
• Ontario, Canada 75 principals and gt 40 vice
  principals expect to retire by 2007
• England 4/10 deputy/assistant principals have no
  plans to become a principal and 4/10 principals
  are considering early retirement

29
Main objective of these activities

• To provide policy relevant, robust, international
  indicators ,analysis and best practices to assist
  in the development and improvement of policies on
  teachers, teaching and learning

30
1. Thematic review

• Analytical strand
• Country Background Reports Policies and
  structures that impact on the role and
  development of effective school leadership
• Innovative practices strand
• Case studies of innovative practices to
  complement analytical strand
• PISA
• Explore PISA questionnaire for school principals
  

31
Participating countries/regions

• Korea
• The Netherlands
• New Zealand
• Norway
• Portugal
• Slovenia
• Spain
• Sweden
• United Kingdom (England)
• United Kingdom (Scotland)

• Australia
• Austria
• Belgium (Flanders)
• Chile
• Denmark
• Finland
• France
• Hungary
• Ireland
• Israel

32
Expected outputs

• Synthesise research on issues related to
  improving leadership in schools
• Innovative and successful policy initiatives and
  practices
• Policy options for governments

33
Main steps

• Country Background Reports (2006)
• International workshops (2006 and 2007)
• Expert papers/reports
• Selected case studies (2006-2007)
• A final international conference (2008)
• A final comparative report (2008)
• An activity website http//www.oecd.org/edu/schoo
  lleadership

34
2. Survey of teachers, teaching and learning
(TALIS)

• Three main areas
• Recognition, feedback, reward and evaluation of
  teachers
• School leadership
• Teaching practices, beliefs, and attitudes
• Plus relevant aspects of
• Teachers professional development, experience
  qualifications
• School climate

35
Countries participating

• Lithuania
• Malta
• Malaysia
• Netherlands
• Norway
• Poland
• Portugal
• Spain
• Slovak Republic
• Slovenia
• Turkey

• Australia
• Belgium (Fl)
• Brazil
• Czech Republic
• Denmark
• Estonia
• Hungary
• Iceland
• Ireland
• Japan
• Korea

36
Survey design

• Core sample
• Lower secondary teachers and school principals
• International sampling options
• Primary teachers and school principals
• Upper secondary teachers and school principals
• Teachers in PISA 2006 schools
• 200 schools, 20 teachers
• Response rate (75, 75)
• Teacher and Principal questionnaires (40 Minutes)

37
Questionnaires

• Teacher questionnaire
• Background information
• Professional development
• Teacher evaluation, feedback, rewards
• Teaching practices, beliefs and attitudes

• Principal questionnaire
• Principal background information
• School background information
• School management
• School resources
• Focus on school leadership and related issues
  that connect with/impact upon other survey themes
• Teaching practices, beliefs and attitudes
• School climate
• Recognition, feedback, reward and evaluation
• Professional development

38
Main steps

• 2006
• 1st draft of questionnaires
• 2nd draft of questionnaires
• Questionnaires finalised for pilot
• Conduct pilot
• 2007
• Conduct Field trial
• Conduct main study
• 2007-2008 school year
• Initial report published
• Feb/March 2009

39
Thank youWWW.OECD.ORGwww.oecd.pisa.orgbernard
.hugonnier_at_oecd.org